Whenever I find a NY Times blowing down the street (I can't bring myself to buy it), I always look at the corrections first. Check out these two doozies:

Because of an editing error, a front-page article yesterday about David A. Kay, the C.I.A.'s former weapons inspector, misstated his view of whether the agency's analysts had been pressured by the Bush administration to tailor their prewar intelligence reports about Iraq's weapons programs to conform to a White House political agenda. Mr. Kay said he believed that there was no such pressure, not that there was. (His view was correctly reflected in a quotation that followed the error.)

An article on Saturday about Gen. Wesley K. Clark's difficulties in his first run for office quoted him as saying that a question about his Democratic credentials by the Fox News anchor Brit Hume at a debate on Thursday was "part of a Republican Party agenda." The article also quoted a spokesman for General Clark as criticizing the network.

Because of an editing error, the article omitted a response by Fox News. Paul Schur, a spokesman for the network, dismissed the suggestion that Mr. Hume's question was prompted by anyone. "General Clark should be used to facing tough questions about his record," Mr. Schur said. "This isn't the first time questions have been raised about his affiliation. His handlers should spend their time on more constructive things such as trying to come up with reasons for the general's slippage in the polls."